[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[ihar.hrachyshka at gmail dot com]

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

--- Comment #22 from booxter <ihar.hrachyshka at gmail dot com> 2010-11-06 13:15:25 UTC ---
Ok, let me show you that this language variant is quite strong to have its own
locale.

1. There are 2 (two) Belarusian Wikipedias: be.wikipedia.org (IANA:
be_BY-1959acad, be_BY in glibc) and be-x-old.wikipedia.org (IANA: be_BY-tarask)
with quite similar articles count: 24914 (be) vs. 29004 (be-x-old).

2. As for localisation, we have different open- and closed-source software
having either one or another language variant translations. F.e. OpenOffice,
Mozilla Suite, Firefox, Thunderbird, KDE work with academic language variant
(be_BY-1959acad) though GNOME, Gimp, Xfce4 have tarashkevitsa (be_BY-tarask)
translation (the latter was forced to use be_BY locale till now because there
is no proper place for their contributions). Mediawiki and some other software
packages have both language versions translation.

3. As for real life, Belarusian Academy of Science, schools, state publishers
and media work in -1959acad version. Though some other popular media work in
alternative, -tarask version (mainly: Radio Liberty for Belarus, Radio Racyja,
ARCHE, some private publishers).

I don't know about any official statistics on the percentage of usage of each
of the variants but I think every Belarusian language user will support that
this percentage can vary (80/20 to 20/80 percentage in different spheres with
total stats of about 75/25 for -1959acad and -tarask respectively).

You can read a bit more on the roots of two language norm variants existance
on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taraškievica

So this is not the case of "fringe variations plaguing glibc locale database."
:)

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[pasky at ucw dot cz]

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

--- Comment #23 from Petr Baudis <pasky at ucw dot cz> 2012-04-04 15:48:51 UTC ---
*** Bug 4020 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[pasky at ucw dot cz]

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

Petr Baudis <pasky at ucw dot cz> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |375gnu at gmail dot com

--- Comment #24 from Petr Baudis <pasky at ucw dot cz> 2012-04-04 15:49:02 UTC ---
*** Bug 7014 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[375gnu at gmail dot com]

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

--- Comment #25 from Hleb Valoshka <375gnu at gmail dot com> 2012-12-28 19:11:04 UTC ---
Hey, guys, how much years do you need more to accept this trivial patch and
close at last this annoying bug?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug localedata/1015] be_BY@tarask: new locale

[vapier at gentoo dot org]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo dot org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Summary|There is a need for an      |be_BY@tarask: new locale
                   |alternative belarusian      |
                   |locale                      |

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug localedata/1015] be_BY@tarask: new locale

[maiku.fabian at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

Mike FABIAN <maiku.fabian at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |maiku.fabian at gmail dot com

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug localedata/1015] be_BY@tarask: new locale

[maiku.fabian at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

Mike FABIAN <maiku.fabian at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |maiku.fabian at gmail dot com

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug localedata/1015] be_BY@tarask: new locale

[digitalfreak at lingonborough dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

Rafal Luzynski <digitalfreak at lingonborough dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
                 CC|                            |digitalfreak@lingonborough.
                   |                            |com
         Resolution|---                         |WONTFIX

--- Comment #26 from Rafal Luzynski <digitalfreak at lingonborough dot com> ---
This is what I've received from a native speaker:

"I don't think this change should be done. Since the time
the bug was reported, usage of the alternative spelling has
significantly decreased both in localization projects as well as in
real/web life, and I don't believe there are a lot of people who would
contribute in this specific locale variant. Having all those variants
at this point is just confusing for users. If I were you, I would just
close the bug without a fix.

Ihar"

Therefore I'm closing this.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug localedata/1015] be_BY@tarask: new locale

[375gnu at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

--- Comment #27 from Hleb Valoshka <375gnu at gmail dot com> ---
I absolutely disagree with such bug treatment. Although Ihar does not use it
this does not mean that nobody else uses it.

Of course it no easy to properly work with @tarask locale variant (incorrect
spelling of some strings etc) because the bug was opened 12 (TWELVE!) years ago
without any actions from glibc maintainers.

This is a trivial case, this is not posting glibc to brand new kernel. It's
just a locale definitions, it's attached, what prevents glibc maintainers to
simply copy it into source tree?

Is this how communication with community should be handled?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug localedata/1015] be_BY@tarask: new locale

[cjlhomeaddress at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

Chris Leonard <cjlhomeaddress at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |cjlhomeaddress at gmail dot com

--- Comment #28 from Chris Leonard <cjlhomeaddress at gmail dot com> ---
If a Unicode CLDR locale variant is existing, I think that glibc will
absolutely follow suit.  The simple reality is that the glibc project is
primarily a collection of C-hackers and not linguists.  The Unicode CLDR effort
has a deeper bench of linguistic experience by virtue of developing Unicode
representation.  I personally volunteer my own efforts to assist in developing
the CLDR locale (at least the translated bits) in support of a minority
language community, but I don't think making glibc intervene on internicene
conflicts is very productive.  I can offer Pootle hosting of PO files
representing CLDR regions, languages and scripts to assist a team in developing
the core bits of a CLDR locale.  Actions will speak much louder than ticket
comments.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug localedata/1015] be_BY@tarask: new locale

[cjlhomeaddress at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

--- Comment #29 from Chris Leonard <cjlhomeaddress at gmail dot com> ---
To start on a CLDR locale for be@tarask

Register as a translator here:

https://translate.sugarlabs.org/accounts/register/

Work on these three CLDR related PO files. conveniently including Wikipedia
links for those who are not geographers, linguists or orthographers.

https://translate.sugarlabs.org/be@tarask/

When that is done we'll work on getting the rest of the Unicode CLDR Survey
tool completed (plural forms, etc.)


You have my personal commitment of support in trying to develop a CLDR locale
for be@tarask, as Sugar Labs Translation Team coordinator I work with many
digitally disadvantaged languages and firmly believe in linguistic
self-determination.

Does that sound like a fair alternative to making C-hackers get involved in an
internal Belarusinan issue?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug localedata/1015] be_BY@tarask: new locale

[maiku.fabian at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

--- Comment #30 from Mike FABIAN <maiku.fabian at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Hleb Valoshka from comment #27)
> I absolutely disagree with such bug treatment. Although Ihar does not use it
> this does not mean that nobody else uses it.

If there are people who really want to use it today, we will add it.

> Of course it no easy to properly work with @tarask locale variant (incorrect
> spelling of some strings etc) because the bug was opened 12 (TWELVE!) years
> ago without any actions from glibc maintainers.

We are trying to improve, Rafał and me are currently going through the list
of open bugs related to locales and try to work through that backlog.

> This is a trivial case, this is not posting glibc to brand new kernel. It's
> just a locale definitions, it's attached, what prevents glibc maintainers to
> simply copy it into source tree?

Adding locales is not without cost, each locale needs about 2 MB in
the binary. Some distributions still install all available locales
always by default (for example openSUSE and Fedora do
this). Therefore, having more locales will make the default install
larger.  That is OK for locales which are used by some people, but
adding stuff which nobody uses makes no sense.

And it is sometimes hard for us to figure out whether there are
really any users or not, especially for old bug reports where there
was no activity for a few years.

As Chris Leonard writes, if a locales exists in CLDR, this is also
an indication that it is really used by somebody.

Recently I added a ca_ES.utf8@valencia locale, there I also had
some doubts first whether there are people really interested in using this.
But when I saw that ca_ES_VALENCIA.xml exists in CLDR, I thought:
“OK, this proves that there is real user interest in that locale”.

> Is this how communication with community should be handled?

We want to be nice to the community, but it is sometimes hard for
us to find out which language communities are really active
and which are not.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug localedata/1015] be_BY@tarask: new locale

[digitalfreak at lingonborough dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

Rafal Luzynski <digitalfreak at lingonborough dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
         Resolution|WONTFIX                     |---

--- Comment #31 from Rafal Luzynski <digitalfreak at lingonborough dot com> ---
Thank you Mike and Chris for replying while I was traveling. Indeed, we feel
more comfortable to add or modify locale data if they are copied from CLDR.
Actually our long term goal is to import locale data from CLDR automatically.
Adding locales which are not present in CLDR is possible but always tricky: how
to verify if a locale is correct? how to tell if a community willing to use the
locale really exists? In this case I was told that it does not exist.

So, Hleb, please prove that the community (at least one person) exists and file
a ticket asking to add the locale to CLDR. I suggest to add this locale to
glibc (that means: I or someone else will add) as soon as it draws some
reasonable attention from CLDR maintainers. I don't need to wait until it is
closed and published. For now I reopen this bug report.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[375gnu at gmail dot com]

------- Additional Comments From 375gnu at gmail dot com  2010-01-17 17:11 -------
Created an attachment (id=4525)
 --> (http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=4525&action=view)
be_BY@tarask locale definition for glibc

it's a be_BY@tarask locale definition for glibc. please, accept it at last.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Attachment #529 is|0                           |1
           obsolete|                            |


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[jekhor at gmail dot com]

------- Additional Comments From jekhor at gmail dot com  2009-10-23 20:42 -------
We want to use alternative Belarusian locale in our project (openinkpot.org),
but we don't want to create yet another (216th) patch for glibc.

-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[ihar dot hrachyshka at gmail dot com]

------- Additional Comments From ihar dot hrachyshka at gmail dot com  2009-10-23 20:29 -------
Dear Ulrich: Is there any chance we can get the bug fixed in glibc?

-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[ihar dot hrachyshka at gmail dot com]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |ihar dot hrachyshka at gmail
                   |                            |dot com


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[375gnu at gmail dot com]

------- Additional Comments From 375gnu at gmail dot com  2008-05-17 05:32 -------
we really need additional belarusian locale (be@tarask as aproved by IANA). Just
because the most of translations made for be@tarask, not for be, and you can't
ignore this fact

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[ihar dot hrachyshka at gmail dot com]

------- Additional Comments From ihar dot hrachyshka at gmail dot com  2007-12-19 21:02 -------
IANA authorities has already approved the official name of alternative
Belarusian orthography variant: be-tarask
Here is the link: http://www.iana.org/assignments/language-subtag-registry
Can we register this locale then?

-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[ihar dot hrachyshka at gmail dot com]

------- Additional Comments From ihar dot hrachyshka at gmail dot com  2006-11-13 10:41 -------
BTW, the Debian be-locale-data supports the be_BY@alternative extension quite a
lot. Please, make this extension upstream.

-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[ihar dot hrachyshka at gmail dot com]

------- Additional Comments From ihar dot hrachyshka at gmail dot com  2006-11-09 11:47 -------
So what's the result?
Maybe, it's time to register be_BY@alternative and to move/copy the existing
*.po files of GNOME/coreutils etc. into this "namespace"?

Also we should change the be_BY locale for the norms of standard Belarusian I think.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|WAITING                     |NEW


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[yury_tarasievich at yahoo dot com]

------- Additional Comments From yury_tarasievich at yahoo dot com  2005-12-26 12:24 -------
Just for the record: I've nothing against naming this branch "alternative".




-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[viksia at gmail dot com]

------- Additional Comments From viksia at gmail dot com  2005-12-14 08:35 -------
If the word 'classic' is controversial point then let name it e.g.
'alternative'. Do not let our puristic discussions lead us to nothing. But we
need the locale.

-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[yury_tarasievich at yahoo dot com]

------- Additional Comments From yury_tarasievich at yahoo dot com  2005-12-13 23:09 -------
Let me re-iterate (and bring this back to topic):

I am, generally, *in* *favour* of this separation of locales.

The way I see it, if folks want their very own sub-locale, then okay and good riddance.
There's already latin-scripted sub-locale approved, created, I hear, for the userbase that is yet to 
emerge one day. So why not one extra?

But then, the initially proposed "classic" qualifier is inappropriate and unmerited, either measured by 
popular support or by usage tradition.
And google hits aren't relevant at all to this exact question of being or not being classic.
Other things, and quite material at that, are.

Be it noticed, I do *not* accept even the general quality of Mr.Shupa's expoundations. 
But that kind of discussion would be well out of scope of this issue.



-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[ShupaS at rferl dot org]

------- Additional Comments From ShupaS at rferl dot org  2005-12-08 13:45 -------
Yury Tarasievich says:

"I think, word "classic" here would be misleading. This qualifier of the 
aforementioned orthography is self-awarded and is inaccurate by any definition, 
as both qualifier and orthography aren't used or recognized as such by anybody 
excepting rather minor minority."

I wouldn't like to start the old discussion with Mr Tarasevich who has some 
unexplained repugnance for that other orthography and has been the only one to 
fight it vehemently in all relevant net discussions.

However, I want to draw your attention to an inaccuracy in his comment - upon 
which all his argumentation is built:

Those who follow that "other" orthography are in slight MAJORITY (not in minor 
minority) on the Net. You can easily prove it - just google any pair of words 
spelled differently in the two orthographies.



-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[yury_tarasievich at yahoo dot com]

------- Additional Comments From yury_tarasievich at yahoo dot com  2005-10-18 08:25 -------
(In reply to comment #8)
...
> So, unless I get some really convincing arguments I'll close this as WONTFIX.

If nothing else comes up, I'm supporting this as it goes.


-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[drepper at redhat dot com]

------- Additional Comments From drepper at redhat dot com  2005-10-14 18:05 -------
I really have no interest to get in the middle of all this.  The extension
@classic seems indeed to be wrong to me from what I read.  And there is already
a Belarusian locale.

Unless this second language variant is the official one (which I doubt it is) it
is best to just collect a tarball with all the appropriate files and distribute
it separately.  There is nothing a separately distribute locale source file
cannot do if it is compiled using localedef upon installation.

Adding variants like this (as opposed to Latin vs Cyrillic, for instance) would
mean we open ourselves to all kind of fights like this.

So, unless I get some really convincing arguments I'll close this as WONTFIX.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |drepper at redhat dot com
             Status|NEW                         |WAITING


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[yury_tarasievich at yahoo dot com]

------- Additional Comments From yury_tarasievich at yahoo dot com  2005-08-04 09:35 -------
I didn't make myself clear, then. This isn't about linguistics at all.

In Belarusian language community, there exists certain interest group, promoting use of several (long obsoleted) 
orthography rules. This group calls their variant of Belarusian orthography "classic".
Alexander Mikhailian proposes creating additional be_BY@... branch, which would assert usage of the mentioned 
orthography variant. And that's perfectly okay! Just the qualifier isn't chosen well.
I wouldn't put "classic" but rather, e.g., "alternative" there because:

The term "classic", by every definition, is something well-recognized, widely or traditionally used.
However, virtually nobody in Belarusian community outside of the interest group (which isn't numerous and/or 
popular!) recognizes the mentioned variant as "classic", neither by knowing or referring the name, nor by usage 
tradition -- as the variant's key orthography features were obsoleted about 70 years ago!
Even the group-promoted usage of name "classic" started, it seems, between 1992 and 1994 (judging by two big 
publications on Belarusian orthography by one of the group leaders).

On the other hand, term "alternative" here would be immediately recognizable, both by popular understanding and 
by group self-imaging.

P.S. The book Kirill A. Shutemov pointed me to contains one of the editions of the mentioned orthography variant, 
published by the interest group, supervised, even authored, it seems, by one of the interest group leaders. 


-- 


http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[cactus at narod dot ru]

------- Additional Comments From cactus at narod dot ru  2005-08-03 13:55 -------
We need Belarusian locale

-- 


http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[kas at altlinux dot org]

------- Additional Comments From kas at altlinux dot org  2005-08-03 13:30 -------
> I think, word "classic" here would be misleading.
See to linguistic literature - http://www.knihi.net/index.php?productID=224
"classic" is name of the spelling.

-- 


http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[adiel at nospam dot kiev dot ua]

------- Additional Comments From adiel at nospam dot kiev dot ua  2005-08-03 13:26 -------
Belarusian locale is very necessary!

+1 !


-- 


http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[mikhailian at altern dot org]

------- Additional Comments From mikhailian at altern dot org  2005-06-22 00:27 -------
Created an attachment (id=529)
 --> (http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=529&action=view)
be_BY@classic belarusian locale

OK, here comes the modified version. Sorry for the delay.

-- 


http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

[Bug localedata/1015] There is a need for an alternative belarusian locale

[barbier at linuxfr dot org]

------- Additional Comments From barbier at linuxfr dot org  2005-06-16 20:49 -------
Alexander, you should consider replacing LC_* sections by
  copy "be_BY"
when they are identical to be_BY (i.e. all except LC_TIME,
from what I've seen, and of course LC_IDENTIFICATION),
this would help future maintenance of your locale files.

-- 


http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.